(Mainly) Political Musings from "Sudbury" Steve May, Officer of the Nickel Belt Greens.

Friday, June 30, 2017

Mapping the Way Forward for a Kingsway Entertainment District

The recent decision by Greater Sudbury
Council to locate a new events centre on vacant lands on the north side of
Kingsway, just west of the intersection with the Highway 17 by-pass, represents
a sharp departure from the vision contained within the City’s strategic
planning documents. That vision, as some
of the Council members who chose to support a downtown location for the events
centre explained on Tuesday night, has been informed by years of public
consultation. The vision of a strong
downtown acting as the cultural, arts, economic and entertainment heart of the
City is contained in our Official Plan, the Downtown Master Plan, and the
City’s strategic economic development plan.

And yet in its wisdom, Council betrayed
this vision, and opted instead to embrace a new vision for the future success
of the City – one promoted by the majority landowner of the Kingsway
location. It is a vision of the creation
of an Entertainment District on private lands, anchored by a community events
facility. This private developer is also the owner of what are expected to be
the primary tenants of the community events centre – the Sudbury Wolves Ontario
Hockey League team. This new vision was one that resonated with
many in the community – and particularly those who may have never bought in to
the notion that there was ever much value in investing in our downtown.

Selecting the Kingsway

I think it’s fair to say that there were a
few factors that really drove the decision-making process that led Council to
selecting the Kingsway site for an events centre. First of all, the marketing of the
Entertainment District concept has been underway to varying degrees for the
past couple of years. It started publicly with the developer’s pitch to Council
at the Large Projects pitch in November, 2015 (see: “Big ideas and big projects get public airing,” sudbury.com, November 26, 2015). From there, the developer made a number of
pricey acquisitions (including purchasing the Sudbury Wolves) to re-inforce his
position as a ‘community builder’. Slick
websites, a social media strategy, community PR presentations – all helped
create a certain buzz around the concept of an Entertainment District, even if
not all of the information that ultimately entered the public realm proved to
be accurate. As recently as a few weeks
ago, a slim majority of City residents polled by Oracle Research were under the
mistaken impression that the developer was going to build an arena for free –
even though that’s never been a part of anyone’s plans (see: "Majority of Sudburians want referendum on arena," the Sudbury Star, June 26, 2017). Further, the developer and his group has long
insisted that the lands being considered for the events centre are ‘zoned for
development’ – which is factually correct, but completely misses the point that
they are not zoned for the type of development being proposed by the developer
(specifically, a community events centre - see: "True North pleased arena project a priority," the Sudbury Star, May 2, 2016).

It is fair to say that some on Council who
supported the Kingsway location did so specifically because they heard from
their constituents that the Kingsway location was desirable – and that the
downtown was not. For some, that was
enough. Other Council members wholly
embraced the concept of the creation of a new Entertainment District in this
location – believing that selecting the Kingsway as the site for an events
centre would lead directly to a laundry list of uses locating on the developer’s
property. Some of the uses, including a
casino, a four-star hotel and a motorsports park, are backed by businesses /
community groups that made public their desire to locate on the Kingsway,
should Council select the Kingsway location for a community events centre. The status of other uses, such as the
waterpark, additional ice pads, restaurants, etc., are not clear at this
time. It is fair to say, though, that
the vision for these lands includes more than just an arena – and should the
arena be built, there is a very real probability that these other uses will
move forward. The Council members who
cited these other uses, and the opportunity for the creation of an
Entertainment District, as part of their justification for favoring the
Kingsway did so with the knowledge of this probability, even if some chose to
frame their arguments in terms of the uses being a certainty.

And finally, along with a real public
outpouring in support of the vision of an Entertainment District, let it be
said that there was clearly one other factor at play that led to the decision
of Council: along with supporting the Kingsway, many of my fellow citizens were
quite vocal in their opposition to the downtown as a location for the events
centre. A distinct anti-downtown
sentiment often formed the basis of underlying support for the Kingsway. Most often, the anti-downtown sentiment
manifested itself in a lament over a lack of parking – despite the downtown
having an abundance of public parking spaces.
The consultant’s report referred to this phenomenon as a ‘perception’,
while providing facts and figures to demonstrate that the perception was not
informed by the evidence. Despite this,
the consultant actually ranked the downtown location as the lowest-scoring
venue when it came to parking.

Kicking
Around the Downtown

But it would be remiss for any of us paying
attention to the debate in our community to conclude that the anti-downtown
sentiment was in any way limited to the perception of a lack of parking. Through
the course of the discussion that ensued in the mainstream media, consumed
social media, and ultimately worked its way to the Council table, what was
really at play was an “us” vs. “them” classist attitude – one where the
downtown was deemed unsafe - filled with
drug-users, bums and hookers – whereas the Kingsway offered a new and safe
alternative for the good people who just want to go to a Wolves game without
being harassed on the streets by people looking for money to help buy food or
crack. Around the Council table, this
attitude manifested itself in remarks in favour of the Kingsway for its “family
friendly” parking facilities (as opposed to the ones where the drunken bums are
using your car as their personal sofas – or worse) to those opposed to the
downtown location (we can’t build a $100 million events centre next to a
rooming house!)

In part, this anti-downtown sentiment is
yet another expression of the tension that exists between the inner city
(former City of Sudbury) and the outlying areas. Through this lens, the hostility towards to
the downtown is one informed by the notion that the inner city and the downtown
have been the primary beneficiaries of the forced amalgamation that the Region
of Sudbury went through at the turn of the century – and that the outlying
areas have disproportionately had to sacrifice in the form of higher taxes and
reduced services to support the inner city.
Evidence to this effect is, of course, anecdotal – but the anecdotes
form a very real emotional response to the inner city-outer city tension within
our community.

Of course, I don’t buy into the notion that
the inner city has benefitted disproportionally by amalgamation – and I point to
some of the decisions made by this Council as my justification, including the
$100 million Maley Drive extension, and the siting of the community events
centre in an industrial area by a landfill on our urban fringe. While it is true that both of these projects
I’ve identified are cited within the boundaries of the former City of Sudbury,
the point I am trying to make is that so many of our municipal council’s
decisions have been informed by what I consider to be ‘car-centric’ suburban
thinking, rather than based on the notion of building smart, sustainable
communities that will be ready to meet the challenges of the 21st
Century. And I believe that the tension
within our City has played a role in holding the inner city back from being
what it can – and needs to be – going forward.
And that’s why the recent decision to take our community arena out of
the downtown in favour of a new location on the urban fringe feels like such a
slap in the face. That decision betrays
the commitment the City made to itself and to its residents to bolster the
downtown – the economic, social, cultural and entertainment hub of our City –
in favour of what appears to be isolated entertainment and commercial venues in
a sea of parking spaces.

Anyway, Council has spoken, and we are going
with the Kingsway. Although I obviously
favoured a downtown location for the events centre (I actually favour just
renovating the one that we have now, but that option just wasn’t on the table),
I guess I’m going to have to make the most of this new ‘vision’ for our community
– even though it’s clearly not one that I support. That being said, there are ways to make this
vision more palatable. With that in
mind, I believe that the City should adopt moving forward with the new Kingsway
Entertainment District in the manner that I’m mapping here.

Kingsway Entertainment District Secondary
Plan

The creation of an Entertainment District
anchored by a community events centre needs to be developed through a
comprehensive approach led by the City.
Rather than each proposed use proceeding through the approvals system
discretely, at their own pace and on their own schedule, the City has an
opportunity to chaperone all of the uses, including those on private lands,
through the approvals process through the development of a comprehensive
Secondary Plan. A Secondary Plan for the
Kingsway Entertainment District can set out the policy environment in which all
of the uses will operate under; address technical issues with the landfill,
surface and ground water, traffic, servicing and species at risk; and, create
opportunities for public consultation and engagement, so that the entertainment
district that we eventually end up with can be one that all Sudburians will
have had the opportunity to contribute to.

A secondary plan should be informed by the
official plan, and embrace and refine much of that plan’s policy
environment. Strong environmental and
livability principles should be applied, and consideration for the primary
users of the Entertainment District – people – should be prioritized. By prioritizing the needs of people over
cars, an Entertainment District that focuses on user experience can be
created. Fears of isolated, discrete
facilities surrounded by a sea of parking (the “big box” approach) can be
minimized with this approach.
Walkability, cycling and public transportation options both to – and
within – the District will be prioritized.

Since the City seems determined to create a
brand new district for entertainment in a greenfield location, we have the
unique opportunity to create it as we please, largely unencumbered by existing
constraints (save for a few items, identified below). Yes, moving forward in a comprehensive rather
than a piece-meal way may add time to the development process, and it might end
up holding back some of the proposed uses that may be ready to sooner than
others. However, let’s be clear about
where things are at today: none of the Entertainment District uses that have so
far been talked about publicly, including a community events centre, have gone
through any process that has already determined their suitability for the
Kingsway site (except for a hotel and some small-scale commercial/office
uses). The Kingsway lands are industrial
lands – they have not yet been determined to be appropriate for the creation of
an Entertainment District – a decision of Council to select a site for a
community events centre, or the eventual issuance of an RFP for construction,
changes that.

In short, there is simply no good reason
not to proceed in a comprehensive manner at this point.

Please let me repeat that, because it’s
very important. There is no good reason
not to proceed in a comprehensive manner at this point.

The “Advantages” of Piece-Mealing

But there are some bad reasons for not
going the comprehensive route. A
comprehensive approach to development will certainly lead to enhanced public
engagement with regards to how the entirety of the site is ultimately
developed. A piece-meal approach which
looks at each proposed use/facility on its own, in isolation, and on its own
timeline/schedule, will be less likely to lead to the implementation of an
overall development concept that has received the buy-in of the public. And that’s why a piece-meal approach may be
desirable for some – because it will lack in an overall vision, it will likely
end up costing less to actually build.
When the public gets involved and starts suggesting that certain
amenities be included and that built-form and public spaces adhere to high
standards of design (the sorts of things that our existing official plan
already calls for, by the way), it can lead to delay and ultimately increase
cost.

If the goal is to slap together some
buildings as quickly as possible, in the midst of a sea of surface parking,
then proceeding in a piece-meal fashion certainly has its advantage. But that “big box” vision is the one that’s
led to so many terrible suburban spaces that work well only for cars – and even
not very well for them. We can do better
than that. And if we are committed about
constructing an Entertainment District that draws users from across the
province and the nation, than we had better bloody well figure out a way to
build something that doesn’t look like a suburban “power centre”.

A Comprehensive Public Process

Isolated facilities in a sea of surface parking. From True North Strong.

To establish an Entertainment District on
the Kingsway lands, the City first has to determine whether the lands are
suitable for the proposed uses. A
comprehensive approach to District development through a secondary plan will
mean that the City is not reproducing technical studies for each, discrete use
proposed, and can have some assurance that the findings of technical studies
can be implemented without ownership questions raising barriers.

Species at Risk

The Kingsway lands may be home to species
at risk – blanding’s turtle and whippoorwill.
A comprehensive Secondary Plan approach will assess the Entertainment
District lands in their entirety. Lands
that are found to contain species at risk habitat can be clearly delineated and
sectioned off for non-development. If
these lands prove to be too substantial and ultimately limiting the ability of
proposed uses to locate in this area, the City should abandon this
project. I understand that the Ministry
of Natural Resources and Forestry may be able to issue overall benefit permits
for the destruction of habitat, but with numerous, if unexplored, options
available to the City, there really is no reason to go ahead with an
Entertainment District in a location that is determined to be unsuitable.

Land Fill Site

Similarly, a Secondary Plan process means
that the constraints on the entirety of the site imposed by the existence of a
landfill can be assessed, and non-developable areas identified at the
outset. Policies to minimize impacts on
Entertainment District uses and users can also be created at this time, informed
by the technical studies produced by the City.

Traffic

Vehicular access and egress has been
identified as an issue for a community events centre at the Kingsway location.
Traffic issues are sure to be exacerbated by additional Entertainment District uses. With limited options for access/egress,
District impacts on our existing road system will need to be explored – and can
best be explored in a comprehensive way.
Policy recommendations which seek to minimize these impacts should be
explored, but it remains very likely that upgrades to existing roads will be
needed to accommodate anticipated traffic.

The development of a comprehensive traffic
plan for the Entertainment District could also identify how transportation
network upgrades could be cost-shared between the City and the various private
interests. The City’s contribution should include an on-going commitment to
providing transit/shuttle service along prioritized internal and external rights-of-way
(preferably transit-only rights-of-way along the lines of bus rapid transit
systems in places like Ottawa and Mississauga, where feasible – and feasibility
for such a network could easily be built into the Entertainment District). Low Impact Development Standards and Green InfrastructurePolicy should be developed that ensures the use of low impact development standards throughout the Secondary Plan area. These standards should include the use of naturalized vegetation for controlling stormwater runoff, and permeable pavement to minimize flow impacts. Buildings should be carbon neutral or carbon negative - they should be constructed in such a way so as to generate their own energy via the use of solar panels and wind energy elements. Renewable energy facilities should be found throughout the secondary planning area.

Parking

One of the selling features of the Kingsway
site was the opportunity to create abundant surface parking for the travelling
public. However, the creation of parking
on such an expansive scale is at odds with the direction that governments are
moving in to curb personal vehicle use for the sake of climate change mitigation. Abundant, free parking also raises the
question of costs – for parking is never free.
Given that the community events centre is intended to be a community
facility, it will be the taxpayers of Greater Sudbury that will be subsidizing
free parking.

A comprehensive review of the Kingsway
Entertainment District proposal will need to look at a number of issues with
regards to parking. While acknowledging
the reality that the District will be accessed primarily by personal vehicles,
policies should nonetheless be developed
that will allow the travelling public the benefit of alternatives to personal
vehicle access, while at the same time discouraging this form of access. Ultimately, fewer vehicles on access roads
and in parking facilities benefits taxpayers and Entertainment District users
both.

The City should:

Develop policies which minimize parking
requirements. Shared parking facilities
between various Entertainment District attractions should be required, which
will reduce the number of parking spaces needed. Only a comprehensive analysis – rather than a
piecemeal approach – can work to limit parking for each discrete Entertainment
District use.

Explore opportunities for non-surface
parking facilities, such as parking garages, in order to minimize the
application of road salt in the Ramsey Lake watershed and to better use
Entertainment District lands more efficiently.
Parking garages can help better achieve walkability and make the
Entertainment District more attractive to users.Require paid parking at all Entertainment
District lots, to balance the taxpayer parking subsidy, and to discourage the
travelling public from bringing personal vehicles to the District. Paid parking
can ultimately lead to a reduction in the number of necessary parking spaces,
and assist with using land more efficiently.

To encourage multi-occupant vehicles,
ensure that High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes are established along the
Kingsway between at least Barrydowne and Coniston, and consider establishing HOV
lanes along other major thoroughfares, including Second Avenue and Falconbridge
Road. Establishing HOV lanes lanes may
require the removal of under-utilized centre-turning lanes along the Kingsway. HOV lanes will encourage car-pooling, and may
provide better access for transit/shuttle services.

High Quality Design

A new Entertainment District needs to be a
place of joy for users. High-quality
design elements and features must be required by the City. These include:

Excellent built-form that creates a sense
of space that makes people want to return. Think here of a comparison between
Science North’s snowflakes and the big box buildings at any power centre you’ve
visited recently. New buildings must be pleasantly designed – they need to be a
joy to look at, rather than cheaply constructed boxes that lack charm.

Design features which favour pedestrians
and cyclists. Unattractive elements
should be hidden from view – this includes not only waste disposal for the
buildings, but parking as well. Any
surface parking feature should be located to the rear of buildings.

Open space and other public amenities
should abound. All-season outdoor attractions
must be required. By doing so, the City
could actually create opportunities to enhance user experiences, through the
requirement for public space set aside for skating, tobogganing, roller-blading,
cycling, etc.

Public amenities should be integrated into
the overall design. Street furniture and
places for people to congregate away from their cars should be planned and
designed in a way that creates opportunities for interacting with other
people. The private sector can certainly
benefit as well, through restaurant patios and other private attractions that
rely, in part, on public spaces for success (food trucks; buskers, etc.).

Focus on the Future

If the matters referenced above ultimately
become a part of the City’s vision for a new Entertainment District, it may
very well be that the Kingsway location becomes a focal point for our community
– as well as “putting it on the map” as a sports and entertainment
destination. If developed in keeping
with the people-first principles identified here, the Kingsway Entertainment
District could ultimately find itself home to some of the City’s
entertainment-based festivals, including the long-running Northern Lights –
Festival Broeal, and the upstart UpFest.
I think it’s fair to say that festival-goers would have no desire to
find themselves trying to have a good time at the Costco parking lot – but if
we were able to create, from scratch, a people-centred entertainment venue that
was accessible and beautiful – and one which ultimately sprang from the hearts
and minds of all Greater Sudburians – who knows what the future might hold.

Just try to forget that we could have
created the vision that I’ve laid out here for a lot less money and for
significantly greater public benefit if we focused on the downtown – as our
strategic planning documents all suggest.
Just try to forget that because Council, in its wisdom, decided that
wasn’t in the cards. So we’ve got to now
try to do the best we can with the creation of the Kingsway Entertainment District. Tell your local Councillor that you’ll accept
nothing less than a comprehensive, planned development proposal – and that you
want to play a part in making it happen. If you do this, they may just listen
to you. If you don’t let them know, it’s
almost certain that we’ll end up with an arena, a casino, a hotel and some
restaurants all floating in a big-box style parking lot.

That’s not the definition of ‘vision’. It is the exact opposite.

(opinions expressed in this blog are my own and should not be interpreted as being consistent with the views and/or policies of the Green Parties of Ontario and Canada)